RicardoM Posted November 19, 2020 Report Share Posted November 19, 2020 Good morning dear developers, I designed a project and then rearranged some of the modules among different roofs (always with the same orientation and inclination), keeping the same total number of modules, same number of inverters and same number of modules per string. Besides the different layout (which influenced cable distances, longer in the secod simulation) I also decreased some cable sections. Comparing both simulations, the 2nd one is 2% lower in total energy output but cable losses, although larger, do not account for that. The main difference I see is what is referred to as "Adaptación MPP" in Spanish, which goes from 2,00% to 4,00%. As both results are quite exact and the second is exactly double, I was wondering, where does that come from? Have I perhaps inadvertantly set that parameter somewhere, so that it is not a product of the simulation but rather a design choice, in the line of soiling losses? If so, where do I change it? If not, what influences it? Please see below an excerpt of the energy balance of both simulations (in the same order): Thanks for your time, kind regards, Ricardo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.